Probability Of Conviction Research Articles

The Role of Complainant/Defendant Gender and Form of Sexual Assault on Jurors’ Perceptions of Prototypicality and Verdicts

We sought to test the effects of sexual assault form and complainant/defendant gender on jurors’ perceptions of the prototypicality of a sexual assault case, complainant, and defendant. We examined whether these perceived prototypicality measures predict mock jurors’ complainant/defendant blame and credibility assessments and if these assessments predict verdict decisions in a simulated sexual assault trial. We predicted that the female complainant–male defendant condition, vaginal intercourse condition, and their combination would be perceived as more prototypical than their counterparts, which would predict blame/credibility assessments, ultimately predicting verdict. Mock jurors ( N = 437) recruited via Prolific Academic read a trial transcript involving an alleged sexual assault (oral or vaginal sex forced onto the complainant) with a female complainant–male defendant or a male complainant–female defendant. They provided a verdict and assessed the perceived prototypicality of the case/complainant/defendant, provided blame/credibility assessments for the complainant/defendant, and responded to rape myth questionnaires. Sexual assault form did not significantly affect any of our outcomes. Mock jurors perceived the male complainant–female defendant condition as less prototypical of a sexual assault case/complainant/defendant than the female complainant–male defendant condition, resulting in negative evaluations of the complainant, favorable evaluations of the defendant, and lowered probability of conviction. Simultaneously, for fixed levels of prototypicality, the female complainant received more negative evaluations, and the male defendant received more favorable evaluations, which lowered the probability of conviction; mock jurors’ rape myth acceptance moderated this effect. Rape myths were predictive of decision-making in cases involving a female complainant, and male rape myths were predictive in cases involving a male complainant. Results demonstrate that prototypicality is a mechanism behind mock jurors’ decisions in sexual assault trials and elucidate the distinctive role of prototypes and rape myths on juror decision-making, with practical implications for the field of psychology and the criminal legal system.

Homelessness, psychiatric disorders, and violence in Denmark: a population-based cohort study

Homelessness is associated with adverse health and social outcomes. People experiencing homelessness have been found to have a high risk of violent crime victimisation as well as high prevalence of psychiatric disorders. It is poorly understood whether experiencing homelessness is associated with additional risks of violent offending and whether psychiatric disorders contribute to these risks. We examined the association between homelessness, psychiatric disorders, and first violence offence leading to conviction. We did a nationwide, register-based cohort study of all Danish residents who were alive at least 1 day during the study period, born between Jan 1, 1980, and Dec 31, 2006, and aged 15 years or older retrieved from the Danish Civil Registration System, which was linked to registers with information on homelessness, health care, and criminality. The exposure was any experience of homelessness, which was defined as having at least one contact with a homeless shelter during the study period. The outcome was first violent offence leading to a conviction. We calculated incidence rates per 10 000 person-years, incidence rate ratios (IRRs) using Poisson regression analysis, and probability of conviction of a violent offence using an Aalen-Johansen estimator. Analyses were stratified by sex and adjusted for calendar year of the study period, age, other sociodemographic factors, and psychiatric disorders. The study cohort included 1 786 433 Danish residents aged 15-42 years living in Denmark at some point from Jan 1, 2001, to Dec 31, 2021, contributing to 21 336 322 person-years at risk, of whom 57 084 (3·2%) individuals had their first violent offence leading to conviction during follow-up. 10 years after their first contact with a homeless shelter, 22·9% (95% CI 21·6-24·2) of men and 7·7% (6·8-8·7) of women had committed at least one violent crime leading to conviction. The fully adjusted IRRs of a violent offence leading to conviction were 4·8 (4·5-5·1) in men and 6·3 (5·6-7·2) in women experiencing homelessness compared with individuals who had not experienced homelessness. The IRR for a violent offence leading to conviction was highest in individuals experiencing homelessness and having co-occurring psychiatric disorders compared with those not experiencing homelessness and without co-occurring psychiatric disorders, especially drug use disorders (IRR in those experiencing homelessness and having a drug use disorder: 15·3 [14·1-16·7] in men and 40·1 [33·9-47·5] in women compared with individuals not experiencing homelessness and having no drug use disorder). Individuals experiencing homelessness had higher risks of a violent offence leading to conviction than those who had not experienced homelessness. In addition to preventing homelessness, public health and policy should consider how to reduce the risk of adverse outcomes in people experiencing homelessness. Lundbeck Foundation.

Settlements in the presence of leniency programs: Costs and benefits

AbstractOver the last few decades, leniency programs have become important components of anti‐cartel policies in many jurisdictions. An extensive literature shows how such programs can destabilize cartels and even discourage their formation in the first place. Much less studied are settlement policies under which reduced fines are offered to settling parties late in the prosecution (when the probability of conviction is high). In particular, there has been little attention paid to the interaction of leniency and settlement policies. This paper examines whether the availability of late‐stage settlements could negatively impact the effectiveness of early‐stage leniency programs. Our main finding is that an appropriately designed settlement program can make collusion more difficult: In equilibrium, the adoption of an optimal settlement program by the Antitrust Authority reduces the occurrence of cartels by decreasing the long‐run gain from collusion. However, an overly generous settlement policy may undermine leniency programs and encourage the formation of more cartels.

Evaluating Racial and Ethnic Invariance Among the Correlates of Guilty Pleas: A Focus on the Effect of Court Legitimacy, Attorney Type, Satisfaction, and Plea-Offer Evaluation

Objectives Research has identified racial and ethnic disparities in rates of guilty pleas relative to trial where minorities are more likely to proceed to trial, though little research has explored the source of this disparity. Methods vUsing an adult nationwide sample and a vignette methodology, this research uses Ordinary Least Squares regression to explore differences in White, Black, and Hispanic defendants’ willingness to accept a guilty plea (WTAP). Results Though there are not significant direct effects of race or ethnicity on initial WTAP, there are racial/ethnic differences in theoretical antecedents of WTAP such as perceived probability of conviction, court legitimacy, and attorney type. However, there are not differences in the effects of theoretical antecedents on WTAP across race or ethnicity. Significant differences by race/ethnicity also emerge following a defense attorney's evaluation of an offer and are conditional on guilt. Conclusions Racial/ethnic differences in rates of plea acceptance are likely due to cumulative racial/ethnic differences in antecedents of WTAP, differences in the effect of attorney evaluation by race/ethnicity, and/or factors that were not directly examined in this study such as variation in plea offers. Implications for future research on the nexus between plea bargaining and race/ethnicity are discussed.

The defense lawyer’s plea recommendation: Disentangling the influences of perceived guilt and probability of conviction.

The defense lawyer’s plea recommendation: Disentangling the influences of perceived guilt and probability of conviction.

Supplemental Material for The Defense Lawyer’s Plea Recommendation: Disentangling the Influences of Perceived Guilt and Probability of Conviction

Supplemental Material for The Defense Lawyer’s Plea Recommendation: Disentangling the Influences of Perceived Guilt and Probability of Conviction

Behavioral Economics in Plea-Bargain Decision-Making: Beyond the Shadow-of-Trial Model

AbstractLegal scholars have long assumed that plea bargains are contracts negotiated between rational actors who adhere to the dictates of the normative shadow-of-trial model. The two key features that rational actors presumably haggle over in the shadow of trial are the criminal charge (and associated sentence) and the probability of trial conviction. The behavioral economics theory ofdiscounting, however, offers a theoretical foundation for testing the shadow-of-trial model. This article summarizes findings from experimental discounting studies in behavioral economics and psychological science – showing that these paradigms can be successfully applied to the plea-bargaining decision context wherein the likelihood of trial is uncertain and delayed, and the plea bargain is relatively certain and immediate. We suggest that the implications of applying discounting to plea bargaining are three-fold: (1) empirical evidence suggests that the shadow-of-trial model is too narrow; (2) the discounting of non-monetary losses may involve slightly different psychological processes than contexts involving monetary outcomes; and (3) probability of conviction and delay until trial constitute situational features that elicit guilty pleas despite a defendant’s factual innocence.

Racial bias and DUI enforcement: Comparing conviction rates with frequency of behavior

AbstractResearch summaryThis study estimates disparities in driving under the influence (DUI) convictions relative to the frequency with which racial/ethnic groups engage in alcohol‐impaired driving. We use had‐been‐drinking crashes and self‐reported alcohol‐impaired driving to approximate alcohol‐impaired driving frequency for racial/ethnic groups in California from 2001 to 2016. DUI conviction and had‐been‐drinking crash data are from a sample of 72,368 California men aged 21–49 in 2001. Self‐reported alcohol‐impaired driving rates are from male Californians who responded to the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. Relative to race/ethnicity‐specific estimated rates of engaging in alcohol‐impaired driving, Latino/Hispanic men had higher rates of DUI conviction than White men. This suggests racial bias plays a role in DUI convictions, with White men experiencing a lower probability of conviction than Latino/Hispanic men who engage in similar behavior.Policy implicationsThese findings suggest actions aimed at reducing individual and structural biases could lead to more equitable DUI conviction rates. Such actions could include limiting discretion at each level of the criminal justice system, for example, by providing prescriptive guidance to officers on when to stop drivers or using local had‐been‐drinking crash rates to determine sobriety checkpoint and saturation patrol locations.

Post-Release Source of Income and Convictions of Formerly Incarcerated Adults

This study examines the relationship between post-release source of income and convictions for different types of crime. Longitudinal data from a sample of formerly incarcerated adults ( n = 10,879) released from Dutch prisons were used. Fixed effects models show that, compared with receiving social benefits, post-release employment is associated with a lower probability of convictions for crime in general, and for property crime. Persons who are not employed and do not receive benefits have a higher likelihood of conviction for any crime, property crime, and violent crime compared with those receiving social benefits. The magnitude of this positive relationship is stronger for those living alone, for women, and for persons older than 25. Results have implications for crime control policies.

The paradox of conviction probability: Mock defendants want better deals as risk of conviction increases.

Objective: We examined how probability of conviction affects the maximum plea sentence mock defendants will accept. Hypothesis: Relying on Prospect Theory (Kahneman & Tversky, 1979), we hypothesized that, relative to the expected value of trial, participants would need increasingly better sentences as conviction probability increased and would settle for sentences worse than the expected value of trial when probability was very low. Method: We manipulated conviction probability and potential trial sentence in a series of three between-subjects experiments, with Amazon Mechanical Turk participants assigned to the role of guilty defendants. Participants were majority White (75-82%) and non-Hispanic (92-94%); approximately half (45-51%) identified as female. Study 1 (N = 681) explored the effects of conviction probability (.05, .15, .50, .85, .90) and potential trial sentence (5, 20 years) on the maximum sentence accepted in exchange for a plea. Study 2 (N = 343; X¯age = 37.5) clarified results of Study 1 for the upper range of probabilities for two potential trial sentences (5, 10 years). Study 3 (N = 1,035; X¯age = 37.6) replicated the effects of probability (.05, .10, .15, .50, .85, .90) and potential trial sentence (5, 10 years). Results: Across all three studies, participants wanted increasingly better deals (relative to the expected value of trial) as conviction probability increased. For example, in Study 3, when probability of conviction was 0.90, plea sentences were, on average, 58% better than the expected value of trial; in contrast, when the probability was 0.05, sentences that were nearly 4 times the expected value of trial were acceptable. Conclusions: The most commonly used model of plea decision-making, Shadow of the Trial (SOT) (Mnookin & Kornhauser, 1979), assumes a direct and constant linear relationship between conviction probability and plea sentence. In contrast, our data suggest that the way conviction probability affects mock defendants' appraisals of plea offers may change across the probability spectrum. These results can facilitate development of a more comprehensive model of plea decision-making. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Unintelligent Decision-Making?

The disclosure of evidence, primarily from the prosecutor to the defense (i.e., discovery) is key to a fair and just legal system. Restrictive discovery policies have been criticized for contributing to innocent defendants pleading guilty (Alkon, 2014) and to uninformed plea decisions (Friedman, 1971). Open-file policies, in which prosecutors broadly share evidence with the defense, are a leading reform to address these issues. This study investigated the impact of guilt and access to discovery information (with or without exculpatory evidence) on plea decisions. We hypothesized that, in comparison to their counterparts, participants who had access to all of the evidence (i.e., those in open-file condition) and participants who were innocent would rate the evidence against them as significantly weaker, their probabilities of conviction at trial as significantly lower, and would be less likely to take the plea deal. We also hypothesized that ratings of evidence strength and probability of conviction would mediate expected relations between the plea decision and conditions. One-hundred participant-defendants were randomly assigned to open- vs. closed-file and guilt vs. innocence conditions, and asked to review case materials that either contained full or partial discovery. They were then asked to rate the strength of the evidence against them, their probability of conviction, and to accept or reject a plea offer in a hypothetical case. Defendant guilt and access to discovery information impacted perceived evidence strength, which subsequently impacted plea decision-making. Our findings indicate that access to discovery information indirectly impacted defendants’ plea decisions.

Diverging from the shadows: explaining individual deviation from plea bargaining in the “shadow of the trial”

The “shadow of the trial” (SOT) theory posits that plea decisions result from mathematical predictions of probability of conviction (POC) at trial and potential trial sentence (TS). Tests of the SOT model often find support in the aggregate, but not at the individual level. This study examines the factors that account for adherence to, or deviation from, the SOT model, such as mathematical competence, a factor not previously examined in tests of the SOT model. Participants were randomly assigned to one of nine conditions corresponding to manipulations of probability of conviction (10%, 50%, 90%) and potential trial sentence (5, 15, 25 months). After reading a case description, participants were asked whether they would accept a plea offer and how much time in jail they would be willing to spend; a subset of participants was offered a counter plea offer. Participants then answered questions assessing numeracy and about their legal opinions and personal characteristics. Results showed that probability of conviction, but not trial sentence, influenced shadow model adherence. Participants assigned to 50% and 90% POC conditions were significantly less likely to deviate from the SOT model than participants assigned to 10% conditions. This effect did not interact with TS. Additionally, the odds of fitting the SOT model increased significantly as participants’ numeracy scores increased. Our results raise questions about the validity of the SOT model at low POCs and challenge its assumption that defendants are capable of conducting the mathematical calculations required to fit the model.

The Optimal Standard of Proof with Adjudication Avoidance

AbstractActors, whether guilty or innocent, may invest in costly measures to reduce their likelihood of being audited. The value of these investments are increasing in the probability with which they expect to be found guilty conditional on being audited. Because strengthening the standard of proof reduces the probability of conviction, it also lowers the investments by actors to reduce their likelihood of being audited. Therefore, when balancing such avoidance costs and deterrence effects, it is optimal to employ a stronger standard than that which maximizes deterrence, namely stronger than preponderance of the evidence.

Bargaining in the Shadow of the Trial? Deaths of Law Enforcement Officials and the Plea Bargaining Process

Plea is the cornerstone of the U.S. criminal justice system and the in the shadow of the framework, where the plea reached is driven primarily by the expected sentence arising from a trial, is the convention for applied economists. Criminologists and legal scholars challenge the bargaining in the shadow of the trial model's accuracy. There has not been a test of the validity of the conceptual framework. We provide one. We use a large data set of felony cases in Florida to estimate the plea discount received. Our novel identification strategy is to consider deaths of law enforcement officials, which we argue is a newsworthy, tragic event affecting a local community and making violent crime salient to the citizens who make up the potential jury pool. Those cases, unrelated to the death, but already in process at the time and in the same location as the death, act as our treated observations experiencing an exogenous shock to their probability of conviction. We show that these individuals plea guilty to substantially longer sentences but, importantly, that the difference in the sanctions between guilty pleas and convictions reduces. This effect is especially strong for deaths of law enforcement officials who die via gunfire, when there is more internet search behavior by the local population, when the death occurs closer to the date, and when road dedications were made in the fallen officers names. The reduction in the plea discount is greater for serious crimes, but also exists for less-serious crimes. Thus, plea becomes relatively less generous. Theory does not predict, though, what will happen to the rate since tougher offers from the prosecutor should lead to more trials, but the heightened conviction probability should encourage negotiation. We find that the likelihood of a increases, consistent with the hypothesis that prosecutors are making less-generous plea offers. Thus, we provide strong evidence that plea occurs in the shadow of the trial.

Delay and Probability Discounting of Legal Outcomes

Legal consequences, including incarceration and contact with the criminal justice system, dramatically impact the lives of many individuals and their families. Though approximately 95% of convictions in state courts are resolved by defendants’ guilty pleas, and the majority of guilty pleas are reached via plea bargaining, there have been relatively few empirical studies assessing the impact of impulsive and risky decision-making strategies in plea-bargaining arrangements. The purpose of the current study was to evaluate the degree to which the magnitude of potential legal consequences and the type of legal consequence (prison time vs. sex-offender registration and notification requirements) affect discounting of hypothetical legal consequences as a function of changes in (a) the probability of receiving the consequence or (b) the delay to receiving the consequence in a sample of 486 undergraduates. Overall, participants were more impulsive when plea bargains involved sex-offender registration and notification consequences compared to only prison time. For both prison time and sex-offender registration, participants were less impulsive when they were facing larger potential sentences (e.g., 1-year sentence vs. 25-year sentence). Additionally, participants discounted legal outcomes at different rates based on the probability of conviction, with no differences in discounting observed across consequence type (i.e., prison time and sex-offender registration) or magnitude (e.g., 1-year sentence vs. 25-year sentence).

The Optimal Standard of Proof with Adjudication Avoidance

Actors, whether guilty or innocent, may invest in costly measures to reduce their likelihood of being audited. The value of these investments are increasing in the probability with which they expect to be found guilty conditional on being audited. Because strengthening the standard of proof reduces the probability of conviction, it also reduces the investments by actors to reduce their likelihood of being audited. Therefore, when balancing such avoidance costs and deterrence effects, it is optimal to employ a stronger standard than that which maximizes deterrence, namely stronger than preponderance of the evidence.

How much would eliminating drug crimes decrease racial/ethnic gaps in criminal conviction?

Since the 1970s, criminal justice contact has become an increasingly common event in early adulthood, and disproportionately so for African American men. Policymakers often argue that reducing drug-related conviction rates is among the easiest ways to reduce racial/ethnic disparities in incarceration. These arguments are often backed by statistics that convey the number of drug offenders in contact with the criminal justice system at a given point in time. Unfortunately, we know little about the extent to which over-time conviction risk and associated racial/ethnic disparities may be affected by drug-related policy changes. Using a novel application of the single decrement life table to analyze data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997 (NLSY97), I present a quantitative thought experiment to consider the extent to which the elimination of drug-related offenses would affect racial/ethnic disparities in men's cumulative probability of conviction by age 30. Consistent with prior research, results indicate that black men are at disproportionately higher risk of ever experiencing a drug-related conviction, and of experiencing a drug-related conviction at each conviction instance. More surprising, however, is the finding that while the removal of drug sentencing may significantly impact racial/ethnic disparities associated with conviction, only a relatively small proportion of those ever convicted would avoid conviction altogether in the absence of drug-related sentencing.

Reforming Indonesian Rape Law: Adopting U.S. Rape Shield Law in Excluding Prejudicial Evidence

Rape is a complicated crime in term of law enforcement. It is usually occurred by someone who has close relationship or connection to the victim. The availability of evidence is also limited. Unfortunately, sexual violence victim often does not receive proper handling from law enforcement. In several cases, the judge undermined victim’s testimony because of past sexual history and lack of resistance that led to more lenient punishment or acquit the defendant. Therefore, I assert that rape law itself should be revised to minimize judge’s prejudice or bias to several shreds of evidence. I suggest that Indonesia could learn from U.S. rape shield law that gives more protection to sexual violence victim. This law encourages the victim to report and increases the probability of conviction because it excludes victim’s previous sexual history and lack of resistance.

The Role of Age in Plea Bargain Decision Making

Research has elucidated that defendants in criminal cases behave differently depending on their age. How age specifically affects plea bargain behavior, however, has only been sparsely investigated. In four studies, we observed that age influences whether lay individuals’ plea bargain decision making is concordant (i.e., accept plea bargains if guilty and opt for trial if innocent) or discordant (i.e., accept a plea bargain if innocent and opt for a trial if guilty) in ‘mock’ criminal scenarios. In line with emerging adults’ (18-28 years old) increased just-world beliefs and illusions of transparency, Study 1 provided indirect evidence that emerging adults’ plea bargain decision making is more concordant than mature adults (29-40). Study 2, however, found that this effect is dependent on the defendant’s likelihood of conviction. Studies 3 and 4 emulated Studies 1 and 2, however, they examined how parents of differently aged children advise their children regarding plea bargains decision making. Parents of younger children (8-11 years old) advised their child similarly to how they themselves would act. Parents of adolescents (12-18), on the other hand, adopted an entirely concordant approach, advising their adolescent child to behave according to their child’s culpability. Overall, we find that individuals’ approach to plea bargain decision making depends on their age group (or the age group of their children), culpability, and probability of conviction.

The heterogeneous effects of education on crime: Evidence from Danish administrative twin data

Using administrative Danish Register Data to identify all twins born 1965–1982, this paper estimates heterogeneous effects of education on crime. Controlling for genetic and environmental factors, the completion of upper secondary education significantly lowers the probability of conviction for total, property, and violent crimes for males. Family factors matter—education lowers crime earlier in the life cycle for children of low educated parents and later in life for children of high educated parents. Exposure to crime during childhood similarly impacts the dynamics of the crime reducing effects of education across the life cycle. Examining different educational programs reveals completing high school is important for crime reduction, while vocational education has a smaller impact on crime. Results are robust to controlling for differences in early health, directly estimating reverse causality between education and crime, and using data on prison sentences instead of convictions.